3 ms·
> Sensationalized TV coverage of mass shootings may encourage more of them Sensationalism sells ads. You're asking the media to act against their own interest
by hirundo 7y ago
> Sensationalized TV coverage of mass shootings may encourage more of them
Sensationalism sells ads. You're asking the media to act against their own interest in order to serve a greater public interest. But if one outlet doesn't do this, another will. Therefore such coverage is inevitable with a competitive free press.
A non regulatory solution would involve making such coverage not sell more ads. That means making sensationalized murders less attractive to viewers. That means reshaping human character in a fundamental way. Quite a project.
- rale00 7y agoMaybe the solution is to go after the advertisers. If there was backlash from the public towards companies whose products were advertised next to programs that sensationalized murder, those companies would cut funding in a hurry. The media would reform itself in a hurry in that case.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- squarefoot 7y agoA hundred times this. Nothing is going to change until they're hit where it hurts more: profits. Enough people taking note of all products showed during or very near mass shootings coverage and then refusing to buy them, possibly informing the companies about the choice, would send quite a message.
- 1123581321 7y agoSuch a movement would need to be popular enough to bring its own additional attention to shootings. In order to spread information about the details of the news and the advertisers, it would effectively become an alternate news source about them.
- scotty79 7y agoWhy not just regulate that no ad can be displayed in 30 minutes before or after mass shooting is mentioned on TV?
- jessaustin 7y agoThat would not survive a 1A challenge.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]